Skip to main content

About your Search

20130113
20130121
STATION
CSPAN 6
CSPAN2 3
MSNBC 1
MSNBCW 1
LANGUAGE
English 13
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
in nearly the past three years, and the whole fiasco added to the deficit. host: after the news conference yesterday, house speaker john boehner responded with this statement -- " what are your thoughts on this? if the debt ceiling negotiable. some quick comments -- remember, you can post your comments on twitter. the first phone call is from maryland, a democratic caller, jill. caller: i don't believe the debt ceiling is negotiable. it is kind of ridiculous that the money is already owed, so why are we not going to pay what is owed to other people? if people have made investments, the bills have to be paid. i find it ridiculous that people in congress don't want to pay what is already owed. it does not make sense. host: here is the wall street journal this morning. caller: well, if you're asking me if that's true, i think there definitely needs to be somewhat of a compromise as far as spending cuts, but that is not an easy issue, because spending cuts mean job losses. it's not an easy thing to say a president will say we will stop paying the bills too. so there has to be compromised rehab
reduced the federal deficit even by a dollar. we are not going to get out of this overnight. this would allow us to keep reducing the deficits. we have a shared value in eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. we are intent on that. host: how much of the budget does waste, fraud, and abuse make up? guest: i could go back to virginia beach, virginia, and we could identify waste every day. we will never eliminate it entirely. we can do a better job. it will take reforms. we are living longer and we have fewer people paying in. i want to protect those who are hurting the most, like art, who called in earlier. host: lester is a republican. caller: good morning. disability, 63 years old. my wife still works. $45,000 a less taw less than year. somehow someone is going to have to do something about this. guest: i agree completely. i believe it is immoral for one generation to pass on debt that dims their future. those who have served our country -- i am mindful of the price paid by our goldstar families. we're failing the young people. i am with you. i was over it. i believe when americans are gi
as our tax burden is, it has not kept pace with public spending. for decades we have piled deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future and our children's future for the temporary convenience of the present. to continue this long trend is to guarantee tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic upheavals. you and i, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we're not bound by that same limitation? we must act today in order to preserve tomorrow. and let there be no misunderstanding -- we are going to begin to act, beginning today. [applause] the economic ills we suffer have come upon us over several decades. they will not go away in days, weeks, or months, but they will go away. they will go away because we as americans have the capacity now, as we've had in the past, to do whatever needs to be done to preserve this last and greatest bastion of freedom. in this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem. [applause] from t
't create new deficit spending. so not raising the debt ceiling is sort of like a family that's trying to improve its credit rating. families that say, i know how we can save money, we won't pay her credit card bills. it was the sole solution to the debt ceiling in august of 2011 in the u.s. downgraded last time. so all these issues are important and it's very important that congress take necessary action to raise the debt ceiling to avoid a situation where government doesn't pay its bills. >> a number of people have expressed concern about how much of the challenges actually were addressed in a deal, it certainly went part way, but leaves a number of issues still on the table. would you care to raise that as an additional fiscal cliff that is facing us? would you think that it's not as concerning as it was when you raise that term initially? >> as i said the fiscal cliff, if it is allowed to take place, it probably would have traded a recession this year. a good bit of that has been addressed. nevertheless, we still have fairly restrictive fiscal policies now. it is estimated that fed
in the late 1980's when we didn't have to talk about how to pay for disaster assistance because the deficit was only $3 trillion. but we've so badly mismanaged our money after that, by the time we got to hurricane katrina in 2005, that we actually did start talking about offsetting and paying for disaster relief and paid for and offset about 40% of it. but we didn't learn. we didn't learn from those mistakes and we've continued to mismanage our money and to run up our deficit to such a point now where we're at $16 trillion today and it's incumbent upon us to have the discussion about whether or not we have the money to do this. and whether or not it's important enough to us to pay for it. i wish very much that we weren't here today. i wish very much that we could pass this and easily borrow the money, without any questions whatsoever. but we've wasted that opportunity. we've mismanaged our own finances to the point where we are now no longer capable of taking care of our own. think about that for a second. in the united states of america we do not have enough money to take care of our own c
deficit hawk. the republican senate committee budget guru, and he is offsetting most of the first slice. the bill's actually two pieces, 17 billion and 34 billion. and he's offsetting the 17 billion portion with a across-the-board cut. so it'll be interesting to see if that passes or not. you know, all democrats will vote against it, and i suspect that it will fail. but it'll be interesting to see. for him it's important because they want to establish the principle that emergency spending needs to be offset with spending cuts. which is something that democrats are very afraid of, because they feel like every time there's a disaster, republicans use it as an excuse to go after domestic programs, social services and so forth. so that'll be an important precedent, and then we'll see what happens in the senate. you know, we'll probably see a house/senate conference on the bill or some ping-ponging between the chambers and probably delaying final enactment. >> host: yeah. and the washington times reporting this morning that the conservative group for growth is threatening to punish members w
important thing he could do is tax reform and deficit control. if he could put those two things together, that'd be bigger than health care. >> steve: you know what? if he were to work with the republicans talking reform-- >> i think that's a lock for next year. >> steve: well, he wants to do something about it. some republicans want to do something about it, remember last time with health care, the republicans had a bunch of ideas and the democrats shut them out completely. maybe this time bipartisan. >> brian: that's not the harry reid i know. >> alisyn: let's get to other stories in the headlines, late last noos night, two drones strikes, at least three of the bodies were burned beyond recognition. the death toll could rise in the hostage crisis at a gas plant in algeria. many were killed including one american. two americans are still missing and the crisis ended yesterday when the algerian army attacked the plant killing two militants. president obama said this is attack is another reminder of the threat posed by al-qaeda and other violent extremist groups in north africa. and the p
this. yes, it may run up the immediate deficit, but once again, for every dollar that we invest in those levees we not only save lives and property, but we put people to work and we get the economic engine going. further up in my district, again, along the sacramento and the rivers, i have a project that's 44 miles of levee that clearly will fail. it has failed four times in the last 60 years. lives have been lost. one of the most catastrophic failures of a levee happened in this stretch of river. we need to rebuild that. the federal government's role in these construction projects of these levees has gone back to the very beginning of this nation and it is congress' task to allocate the money to decide the projects that are going to be built. but unfortunately we tied ourselves in knots here with certain rules that have been put in by our republican colleagues that prevent us from taking the necessary action to protect our communities. we're not talking about, you know, willy nily unnecessary projects. we're talking about saving -- nilly unnecessary projects. we're talking abou
veer -- inadvertently did not disclose information, you are put at a credibility deficit with the public, and sometimes it is hard to dig out of that. it is very difficult for organizations, especially in a crisis response, to think about just releasing the information before it's asked for and remove that deficit. i've been involved in several situations where the information was available and the information was understandable and probably mitigated some of the concerns, but because of the way the companies in the government work, it was difficult to make that transparent and then catching up with that with the american public is really, really difficult. nancy and marcia, we had talked about this with jay a lot. one of the problems we have in mental anguishing impacts -- measuring the impacts of the spill in the gulf is the lack of the background of the presence of hydrocarbons as a baseline for understanding there had been a change. in the context of moving beyond the direct aims of the research that's going to be conducted with the bp money, what do you think the lar
and deficit spending. those are -- >> a balanced way. i'm sure he'll use that language as well. >> a balanced way. opposing goals, but he intends to do them both. >> lynn, do you think we'll hear any talk of energy or climate change at all in the speech tomorrow? >> i do. i think climate change will be an added starter when we look at agenda goals, and i don't know if we had this discussion two months ago, even if curbing gun violence would have been something we would have thought would come up tomorrow. >> yeah. >> but i think that it is -- it is just something that the obama administration did not put a super emphasis on in the last four years and will be something that we'll hear about, in addition to the things that bill talked about. but i think somehow that obama will try to still cast himself as somebody who can try to bring more calm voice to civic discourse. i don't see how it could happen right away, because it didn't happen in the last four years. not sure how he can figure out how to navigate is this time. >> let's listen to some of the other promises made in the president's last
. the problem is if you'd inadvertently did not disclose information, you are put out a credibility deficit with the public, and sometimes it is hard to get out of that, and it is difficult for or organizations to think about releasing the information before it is out for. -- asked for. i have been involved in several situations where the information was available and understandable. it mitigated some concerns. it was difficult to make that transparent, and catching up with that is really difficult. one reason for the impact was the lack of information as a baseline for understanding there had been a change. as a context for moving beyond the research done, what do you think the larger research agenda ought to be about? >> the hydrocarbons in the continental shelf and inland areas are pretty well known. it is the deep sea we did not have information for. i think the deep sea ecosystem is an area we need to emphasize, and some of the longer living organisms such as marine mammals. one of the issues is the effect of multiple stressors. we have some smart jury is that were heavily oiled, and s
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)